Summer '07 Reading: 'To The Lighthouse' by Virginia Woolf

[Jamilah]

Many thanks to all who spent time typing away in an attempt to get me to stay with the book. I do feel much better and I will just read and allow myself to be carried along with the words. Even if I realize that I don't like the book at the end, it's part of the experience. You can't like everything you read, but must reserve judgement until after you've read it. Okay, back I go....

[Walter]

Way to go, Jamilah! YAY!

[Janine]

Jamilah, Good for you! I don't think you shall regret it. I am glad you have the attitude to not judge, until you are done with your reading. Other's should take a lesson from you. It is all a part of the experience, as you said, and if you don't like the book, you can always say you experienced Woolf's writing. Look at your reading like a rare moment into the minds of the various characters. I drifted with the thoughts this time and liked the book much better. Enjoy your reading.

[rakeleta]

First time to me in your book club, I read "To the lighthouse" some years ago, but I promise to read it again for the club.

[Quark]

I do feel much better and I will just read and allow myself to be carried along with the words. Okay, back I go....

First time to me in your book club, I read "To the lighthouse" some years ago, but I promise to read it again for the club.

You know I'm going to hold you to that

[applepie]

I'm about to give up. I read everyone's responses and the book sounds much more interesting to me than I'm finding it. I don't really like the characters, and the stream of conciousness (sp?) method of writing is giving me a lot of trouble. I'll be reading along without an issue, the two or three sections later all I can do is ask myself "What on Earth just happened". Nothing really seems to be happening to me, especially for the volume of chatter. I'm also having some trouble with the changing of who is thinking. I keep forgetting who is really the one thinking during that passage and then I'm really messed up. Any good suggestions on how to try and get through the rest of this?

[Walter]

I'm about to give up. I read everyone's responses and the book sounds much more interesting to me than I'm finding it. I don't really like the characters, and the stream of conciousness (sp?) method of writing is giving me a lot of trouble. I'll be reading along without an issue, the two or three sections later all I can do is ask myself "What on Earth just happened". Nothing really seems to be happening to me, especially for the volume of chatter. I'm also having some trouble with the changing of who is thinking. I keep forgetting who is really the one thinking during that passage and then I'm really messed up. Any good suggestions on how to try and get through the rest of this?

If you don't mind marking in the book, start using a pencil and underlining lightly the words and hints in the text that identify who is speaking, whenever the speaker changes and can be identified, and then use long brackets vertically in the margin to collect that speakers thoughts until the next change of speaker. Keep an eraser handy as you figure things out better and make adjustmennts, and you should finally be able to sort it out. It does really help. It was what I ended up doing.

[manolia]

I am about to finish the book tonight. A quick comment since i don't have the time to write much, right now.
James' great love for his mother and hate for his father reminded me of the greek tragedy of Oedipus. I can't be sure if Woolf had that in mind, though, but for me the thought was inevitable.
Since the book is supposed to be autobiographical, can we presume that Lily is Woolf herself? And if yes what does this tells us about her relationship with women? (I have her almost obsessive love for Mrs Ramsey in mind ). I have read in many a referance, that Woolf was supposed to be a lesbia..is this depicted in the book in the character of Lily? What do you all think?

EDIT

In the begining of the book it is said (by Mrs Ramsey herself, in one of her thoughts) that she was in love with another man who died or something of the sort??? Did any of you notice this??

[Janine]

I am about to finish the book tonight. A quick comment since i don't have the time to write much, right now.
James' great love for his mother and hate for his father reminded me of the greek tragedy of Oedipus. I can't be sure if Woolf had that in mind, though, but for me the thought was inevitable.
Since the book is supposed to be autobiographical, can we presume that Lily is Woolf herself? And if yes what does this tells us about her relationship with women? (I have her almost obsessive love for Mrs Ramsey in mind ). I have read in many a referance, that Woolf was supposed to be a lesbia..is this depicted in the book in the character of Lily? What do you all think?

Hi Manolia, I don't really think it is a Oedipus thing with the boy and his mother (Are we thinking of DHL thread and S&L's?) I thought of that possibility, but then from my additional reading, of critics and commentary, it has not really been pointed out as such. I tended to dismiss the idea myself. It is mostly just that the mother has taken him asside and coddled James, he being the baby of the family, and very sensitive, as well - the text mentions that often. In reality the father is extremely sensitive a man, painfully so and so is James. But James and the mother are aligned and she seems to like it that way. Afterall doesn't she also coddle the father at times to placate him. She puts herself in a position of being the leveling element/peace-keeper between the father and the son. Mrs. Ramsey is a very controlling woman in a quiet way and yet she is keeping her household together probably the best she knows how.
I don't think Lily is at all thinking in a lesbia...fashion about Mrs. Ramsey. I think she is very much a woman sworn to her principals of suffrage and woman's rights and feels she is justified in being single and seeking a husband and yet at the same time she has mixed feelings about that since she very much envies the other woman for her life and loves the family extensively. I think she very much loves Mrs. Ramsey but not at all in a sexual way.
(Hey, M, are we now thinking of the film MD? )

In the begining of the book it is said (by Mrs Ramsey herself, in one of her thoughts) that she was in love with another man who died or something of the sort??? Did any of you notice this??

I picked this up several places in the book, actually, or at least an eluding to the fact that once she has been sublimely happy with someone, but not her husband, prior to her marriage. Someone from her youth was the impression I got and this reminded me right away of the James Joyce story "The Dead" - have you ever read the story? It is a good one, but I won't reveal that story here - it would spoil it for those who wish to read it eventually.

Walter, I don't know about your advise to poor mkhockenberry; I think your method sounds rather labour intensive. I don't know if I could enjoy a book having to mark down all the names and figuring it out that way. It sounds a bit clinical.

mkhockenberry If I might ask how far are you in the book? I have a short attention span myself, so I find this type of writing very difficult. Depending on how far you have advanced, I would say that all books are not for all people and this 'stream of consciousness' style may not be for you. It depends on how persistent you can be; it may be worthwhile to continue, but then again, it may not be. The book is divided into 3 sections and you might find the second section easier or harder. Actually, I thought the writing lovely in the second section, but I did find it harder to read in some ways. There is very little plot in the second part, but mostly description, which is quite poetic. It is not a long book to read but it is quite intricate and complex. If you read back few posts to the last page you will see that a lot of good advise was given to Jamilah!. This might help you, since they also had a difficult time getting into the flow of the book and did not know whether to persist with it.

[manolia]

Hi Manolia, I don't really think it is a Oedipus thing with the boy and his mother (Are we thinking of DHL thread and S&L's?) I thought of that possibility, but then from my additional reading, of critics and commentary, it has not really been pointed out as such..

My sides are hurting (with the phrase in bold)

I guess you are right. But like i said it is difficult for me to read about a situation like this one (son loving dearly his mother and hating his father) and NOT think of Oidepus..

I tended to dismiss the idea myself. It is mostly just that the mother has taken him asside and coddled James, he being the baby of the family, and very sensitive, as well - the text mentions that often. In reality the father is extremely sensitive a man, painfully so and so is James. But James and the mother are aligned and she seems to like it that way.

I agree with this. Mrs Ramsey is the protective force against an indifferent (most of the time he is completely swallowed up by his work, but he has some "good father" glimpses) and some times cruel father. But i got the feeling that James was very jealous when his father was succesfull in securing Mrs Ramsey attention to himself. He got those violence notions (wanting to stick a knife to his heart..)

I don't think Lily is at all thinking in a lesbia...fashion about Mrs. Ramsey. I think she is very much a woman sworn to her principals of suffrage and woman's rights and feels she is justified in being single and seeking a husband and yet at the same time she has mixed feelings about that since she very much envies the other woman for her life and loves the family extensively. I think she very much loves Mrs. Ramsey but not at all in a sexual way.
(Hey, M, are we now thinking of the film MD? )

(phrase in bold)

Well, she didn't strike me as a lesbia too, untill i got nearly the end were 10 years have passed and she is crying and thinking very intensivelly of Mrs Ramsey..and having read that this book is autobiographical, i assumed that Woolf can be identified as one of the characters and the one that seemed more probable was Lilly (being artist and all).

I picked this up several places in the book, actually, or at least an eluding to the fact that once she has been sublimely happy with someone, but not her husband, prior to her marriage. Someone from her youth was the impression I got and this reminded me right away of the James Joyce story "The Dead" - have you ever read the story? It is a good one, but I won't reveal that story here - it would spoil it for those who wish to read it eventually.

That's why i mentioned it..i got the same feeling. Perhaps this is partly the answer to what you were discussing previously on the thread, whether she loved her husband or not.I believe she loved him as a woman loves a man with whom she had 7 (or 8?) children and have passed her whole life together..but that first love, was her true love

[Janine]

manolia, glad you make your sides hurt from laughing. How we are influenced by the last things we read and discussed recently. I too think like that things seem to be carried over from other books such as ideas and references.
I believe, Nancy, who is hardly mentioned in the text, is the daughter representing Woolf, but I could be wrong. More reading outside the novel and in my library commentary may reveal the answer to that. Woolf was one of the children, since this book is basically a portrait of her own parents and the household, or is at least based on her perception of her family vacationing each year at the seaside, and gave her the basic idea for the book. I do think Lily epitomises some of the characteristics/ideals of Woolf's, but I don't think she is mean to represent Woolf herself.

[Quark]

That's why i mentioned it..i got the same feeling. Perhaps this is partly the answer to what you were discussing previously on the thread, whether she loved her husband or not.I believe she loved him as a woman loves a man with whom she had 7 (or 8?) children and have passed her whole life together..but that first love, was her true love

It could very well be true that Mrs. Ramsay had more affection for her first lover, but it still wouldn't solve the question of the Ramsays' marriage. It is true that they have many children, but they don't seem to rally around their kids; or, if they do rally it's for different reasons. And, even if they did feel some common bond through their children, it still wouldn't give us enough information to tell us why they had kids in the first place.

I am curious about the relationship between James and his mother. I didn't make the observation that James was possessive of his mother, but I do remember his violent impulses toward his father. I'll have to go back and see if his hatred of his father is connected with his love for his mother.

[manolia]

manolia, glad you make your sides hurt from laughing. How we are influenced by the last things we read and discussed recently. I too think like that things seem to be carried over from other books such as ideas and references.
I believe, Nancy, who is hardly mentioned in the text, is the daughter representing Woolf, but I could be wrong. More reading outside the novel and in my library commentary may reveal the answer to that. Woolf was one of the children, since this book is basically a portrait of her own parents and the household, or is at least based on her perception of her family vacationing each year at the seaside, and gave her the basic idea for the book. I do think Lily epitomises some of the characteristics/ideals of Woolf's, but I don't think she is mean to represent Woolf herself.

Hehehe Janine, i think i'll wait till you're done with your additional reading and researching and see which character was supposed to be made after Woolf Go on Shirlock I love it when you do your analysing

It could very well be true that Mrs. Ramsay had more affection for her first lover, but it still wouldn't solve the question of the Ramsays' marriage. It is true that they have many children, but they don't seem to rally around their kids; or, if they do rally it's for different reasons. And, even if they did feel some common bond through their children, it still wouldn't give us enough information to tell us why they had kids in the first place.

That's why i used the words "perhaps" and "partly" . Apart from what i have already said, let me add that their relationship being very complex (and very lifelike if you ask me) i believe it isn't meant to be answered with a simple "yes, they were in love" or "no, they weren't". And if you ask me, i don't think it is the most important issue of the book

[Virgil]

Well, I'm back and I will start the novel either tonight or tomorrow. Glad this is a lively discussion. In perusing some of the threads I find things to agree with and things to disagree. I don't know if it makes sense for me to go back. I'll see.

[Quark]

That's why i used the words "perhaps" and "partly" . Apart from what i have already said, let me add that their relationship being very complex (and very lifelike if you ask me) i believe it isn't meant to be answered with a simple "yes, they were in love" or "no, they weren't". And if you ask me, i don't think it is the most important issue of the book

Sorry, I didn't mean to cavil about some small detail. It's just, after three pages of back and forth arguing over a point, you get a little suspicious of anyone who has a quick, concise answer. I don't know how important the Ramsays' relationship is. That greatly depends on what you think the main themes are. I just wanted to make sure we get an accurate idea of the events in the story--relevant or not. And, I just wanted you to say more. It sounded like you were coming up with a good idea, but it wasn't really clear. You still had some "perhaps" and "partly"s. Once the verbal hedges drop away we can really talk about it. Sorry if I sounded combative, I was just trying to be challenging.

Well, I'm back and I will start the novel either tonight or tomorrow. Glad this is a lively discussion. In perusing some of the threads I find things to agree with and things to disagree. I don't know if it makes sense for me to go back. I'll see.

Yeah, if you can go back and read the discussion it would be great. I think people have said some important things--which I've only sometimes gotten in the way of.